MARKANDEYA KATJU, C.J. (ORAL)

1. This writ appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 22.3.2004. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Since the facts of the case are stated in the impugned order, they are not repeated herein.

2. It appears that a provisional seniority list was published on 20.2.1982 inviting objections. Thereafter a final seniority list was published on 19.6.1982. A writ petition was filed in 1988 after a delay of six years. In our opinion, the writ petition was liable to be dismissed on the ground of laches and should not have been heard on merits at all.

3. It may be mentioned that when a final seniority list is published, then certain rights accrue to the persons whose names are contained in that seniority list. If anybody has any grievance against that seniority list, he should challenge it within a reasonable time. In the present case, the writ petition was filed after six years of the publication of the final seniority list. In our opinion, such a stale claim should not have been entertained by this court at all.

4. The principle of laches have been discussed in detail in a Division Bench decision i